This may be a case of trying to find one restoration point when there's
a whole range of them. In general forest area has increased since the
1920's. Prior to white settlement, seasonal fire in the intermountain
region and the west side was widespread and noted by ALL the early
visitors. In the fertile valleys between the Cascades and the Coast
range, fire's were even more ubiquitous. The Willamette and
corresponding area in Washington was burned black yearly by the local
tribes. This is not new stuff.

So what's the point? Major fires will occur whether forests are thinned
or not. Lightning and human nature assures that. I seriously doubt that
Congress is going to finance thinnings in wilderness areas, though his
cronies have stated that the roadless areas left by Clinton may be fair
game. If he reduces fuel loading near settlements, that's a plus. If
not, it's a scam.

Now if the PR stated that "thinning" meant selective cutting for
multi-aged, ecological forest management, I'd feel a bit more confident
in this ploy.

Bottom line: the only thing that CONTROLS fire is the weather.